StarRaider
Yes they do call me Einstein
- Joined
- Mar 6, 2008
- Messages
- 19,548
- Likes
- 53,427
Tara Reade: What are the sex attack allegations against Joe Biden?
Tara Reade, 56, worked as a staff assistant to Mr Biden from 1992-93 when he was a senator for the US state of Delaware.
In recent interviews, she has said that in 1993 her former boss forced her against a wall and put his hands under her shirt and skirt after she delivered him his gym bag.
"There was no exchange, really, he just had me up against the wall," she said to podcast host Katie Halper in March 2020.
"I remember it happened all at once... his hands were on me and underneath my clothes." He then penetrated her with his fingers, she said.
"I remember him saying, first, as he was doing it 'Do you want to go somewhere else?' and then him saying to me, when I pulled away... he said 'Come on man, I heard you liked me,'" she said.
"That phrase stayed with me."
This poon grabbing?
I will defer to you on everything relating to statutes, charging, and possible deals with the prosecutor.Not if there is not a statute.
Not if the two that plead aren’t the ones who forged it, which may or may not be further supported by the existence of a cooperation agreement.
Not if the prosecutor didn’t believe he could prove the case.
Not if the prosecutor didn’t believe he needed the charge.
Not if declining the charge was part of their cooperation agreement.
Not if the “victim” wasn’t taken in by the forgery, of which there is evidence.
The FBI may know, but the fact that they haven’t done anything that clues us in to what they know probably doesn’t indicate what they know.
There’s inconclusive evidence that it’s real. I don’t know why that isn’t sufficient.I will defer to you on everything relating to statutes, charging, and possible deals with the prosecutor.
But I find the whole idea that the FBI was in possession of forged entries into the diary of the President’s daughter to be flat ridiculous.
I do not for one second believe evidence that dashes those journal entries to dust would be kept in the dark. It would come out.
The diary? It’s pretty much accepted that diary (NOT the contents) are indeed real.There’s inconclusive evidence that it’s real. I don’t know why that isn’t sufficient.
I’m saying there is inconclusive evidence that the contents are all authentic and I don’t understand why anyone here, you included, feels the need to try to present it as more than that.The diary? It’s pretty much accepted that diary (NOT the contents) are indeed real.
At least that’s BB’s scenario - that the diary is hers and the duo planted the passages in question.
Are you saying the diary itself is in question?
Not if there is not a statute.
Not if the two that plead aren’t the ones who forged it, which may or may not be further supported by the existence of a cooperation agreement.
Not if the prosecutor didn’t believe he could prove the case.
Not if the prosecutor didn’t believe he needed the charge.
Not if declining the charge was part of their cooperation agreement.
Not if the “victim” wasn’t taken in by the forgery, of which there is evidence.
The FBI may know, but the fact that they haven’t done anything that clues us in to what they know probably doesn’t indicate what they know.
There’s pretty much a statute for just about everything. And if there’s not the prosecutors can twist the meaning and application of some other statute to apply. Then the lawyers will get to bill a lot of hours thinking about it, researching it, and arguing about it.
I agree that there is inconclusive evidence that the contents are all authentic.I’m saying there is inconclusive evidence that the contents are all authentic and I don’t understand why anyone here, you included, feels the need to try to present it as more than that.
@BowlBrother85 any charges?Have there been charges in any state,? Again seems pretty cut and dry if illegal
lol crackhead is going to use the 2nd Amendment to fight his felony falsification of his NCIS form. Cannot make this stuff up.
